Refuse to make financial sacrifices for DSS

[usernc76482]

NC but regular poster. Cannot sleep as I'm drowning in a sea of anxiety.

I'll keep this brief: we (DH and i) can no longer afford to send DSS (Yr 12) to private school. ExW and husband comfortable but I don't think in a position to pay till he finishes secondary education next year. ExW and husband also have DC together who are also at the private school), but I mean, why would the step dad pay for his step son to go to private school when that is my DHs job and part of the original court order? ExW does not work.

At the same time, our DC1 has started at private pre prep (Reception) in September last year. It's looking unsustainable being able to send her there now and we will have to pull her out next term.

We could afford to send one or the other but not both children.

So: we COULD continue sending DSS to school if we take our DC out. I just don't think that's fair? If the children's are going to suffer it should be all of them?

It's been a very financially rocky few years but we had made it work, sold our car, no holidays etc. to continue sending DSS to school. We rent so cannot get a loan or anything against a property.

I'm fed up of making sacrifices.

@franciacorta that's what I'm wondering about. In OPs position I would be happy for DSS to be prioritized for private education over my DD, as I wouldn't personally be that bothered about a 4 year old being in private education, as others have said. But I wouldn't be so happy to be funding it if it came with consequence of the family, including DD, having to move. That does seem like quite an unfair disparity between the two children.

So I will have to uproot my children to live somewhere cheaper and smaller again, continue to make do without a car, take DC1 out of school... and just hope we can make the business work and in a couple of years we will have choices again

OP genuine question, will you really have to move if you take your small child out of private school? That will save an absolute packet given how wealthy you have to be to pay private school fees. I do think your DH missed an easy chance to change things after GCSEs as that would have been a much more sensible time to move the DSS to a state school. In that context I can't understand why you would start another child down the private school route but I guess for you it feels so important that you are willing to sacrifice things which some other people have, like cars and holidays. This is a choice though and TBH most people who sacrifice cars and hols still can't afford private schools so it sounds like you are still better off than you think.

I do wonder though-if it really couldn't be paid-what then?

I do wonder though-if it really couldn't be paid-what then?

Well that would be a very different matter. OP says they can send one child and wonders whether the 4 year old should be prioritized over the 16/17 year old.

Well this post has really worried me now if that were to happen! I’m making a will fist thing tomorrow. Also, not sure why comments got deleted?

@diddl

I do wonder though-if it really couldn't be paid-what then?

I would have thought that if he suddenly stop paying the school would take him to court. Or maybe the mother would pay the debt and take him to court.

What’s a will got to do with it? If your baby has an active and involved father?

Hold on. On any other step parenting thread, if a father had said he will put his child first always before all other kids, they would absolutely be criticised.

They are already. Normally the response to this is no one in the family should be first it should be prioritised by need at the time.
On nearly every single bloody thread this comes up.

So next time a SM posts saying her dp is putting his child first always, you will all be there telling her that's absolutely how it should be?

Fair points. I think a parent who is a stepparent will always have their own children’s needs/wants/wellbeing more at heart. Hence why the op has posted this thread.
If I was a stepmum and I only had enough money in my bank to pay for one coat but both children needed one, I would buy my own child the coat. It would be up to the stepchild’s parents to provide them with a coat. This might be different in the context of stepdad and mum if his wages affect the mum’s income, but in the context of stepmum and dad who are largely nrps, I would absolutely put my own child first and wouldn’t make any sacrifices financially when it comes to my own child’s needs.

Also it’s all about context too. There’s putting your child first and then there’s being a Disney dad. So in response to your last question, if he was always putting his child first in ridiculous ways such as giving his non resident child the biggest bedroom or saying we can only ever do anything fun when my non resident child is here, or if he cancelled on people at the last minute because his child insists on a movie night, then no I wouldn’t be saying that’s how it should be.

But yes, I think everyone in the household should be considered on a need by need basis by the people responsible for doing so.

A will to protect him financially if my husband remarried, fell on harder times and chose to put his new daughter through private school to pacify his new wife while my son gets turfed out.

@aSofaNearYou

It's obvious that, as a couple, they can afford to continue to send DSS to private school, but the OP just doesn't want to because she wants her child to go instead.

Not necessarily. It reads to me like they have been affording to send DSS to private school with considerate sacrifices, and OP has begun to resent it more now that her DD is unable to go. I think this is understandable, as the sacrifices have been joint but she is unable to see her child benefit from them.

It's interesting that you say "as a couple", as on a moral level they shouldn't really be funding it as a couple. He should be funding it. It's quite likely OP wouldn't be able to fund her DD going to private school if their incomes were separate, but I can absolutely see why she might have become increasingly hacked off with the situation if her money is going into a joint pot, and DSSs fees are being prioritised above all else from that. Joint finances only really make clean, easy sense when both people have the same priorities, which is very naturally not the case in this instance.

But her DD is able to go. In fact they’ve been sending their DD and the OP wants to continue, at the expense of her stepson. I said as a couple but in fact it seems that all the money has come from the DH. If the OP is contributing anything to DSS’s school fees I expect she would have said so.

Personally given the update about your financial situation I'd explain this to the school and see if they can help with a bursary. Failing that, I really don't see what other choice you have except tell ExW that if she and her DH can't make 50% then he has to be removed. Let's not forget the step dad has to step up here too.

Could be worse, DSS could have done what mine done and refuse to go back after Easter, just because..... So because we didn't give the terms notice we got landed with a 4k bill when he wasn't even there and we had no leg to stand on.

I wonder if the ex wife got a court order for her son’s fees in lieu of an up front financial lump sum. As the OP has stated she doesn’t work, I suspect she was a SAHM supporting the father while he built up his business. At the time of divorce, she was probably entitled to half of that business, but I do wonder if a deal was struck to essentially split that amount over several years and be allocated for private schooling as she would not be able to continue alone, having not worked. It would then be very unfair to say it’s her responsibility now. We just do not know the background to this but we do know the court felt it necessary for the father to continue to pay these fees.

I suspect the OP’s (admitted) bitterness is clouding her thought process. She’s married a fairly well off man, successful business etc and obviously had a nice life. That’s all gone now. Meanwhile the ex-wife got out while the (financial) going was good, benefitted from that, and has traded up (in financial terms) to her new husband. The OP meanwhile has to deal with the fact her successful husband is no longer that and probably feels the ex got the “best” of his years while she (and her child) go without things his earlier success allowed.

She’s not answering the basic questions many, many PPs have posted, like whether they can afford one set of fees, what the sacrifices would be, if she works etc... I suspect she just wanted a moan to be honest.

Of course you keep the yr 12 in their school .
He is hakf way thru a levels

Where you move etc is up to you

He is not prioitising one child over another for ever. For the next 18 months one will be, then after that it is pretty clear the OP will mke sure her children get priority.

As to the EXW - got nothing to do with her - his court order, his settlement, his responsibilty unless he goes to court and gets it changed.

But is he really going to tell Yr12 child that he needs to change schools whilst Reception child after 1 term stays?

@combatbarbie

Personally given the update about your financial situation I'd explain this to the school and see if they can help with a bursary. Failing that, I really don't see what other choice you have except tell ExW that if she and her DH can't make 50% then he has to be removed. Let's not forget the step dad has to step up here too.

Could be worse, DSS could have done what mine done and refuse to go back after Easter, just because..... So because we didn't give the terms notice we got landed with a 4k bill when he wasn't even there and we had no leg to stand on.

The ex-wife isn't going to accept that if he is paying for his child with OP to go to private school. It's court ordered that he pays so unless he goes back to court and proves can't afford it I doubt he can just stop paying,

You can't move him for year 13.

Pay another year then put your own DC in if you like. Personally I'd find a good state school if money is already tight.

@Belladonna12 maybe I've missed a post from OP but from what I gathered the youngest is being pulled and they are debating selling car, downsizing regardless as they simply cannot afford it.

It may be court ordered but things changed, the money isn't there so why shouldn't the ex and her DH contribute?

And if it was part of the divorce settlement - then she can come back for the equivalent when he gets back into profitability.

Sorry OP simple solutions and not unfair in the slightest.

To the pp who’s thinks there aren’t urgent cases being seen in court due to the pandemic. They are, there are being cases being heard remotely and via telephone.